Salesperson says #4 buck is better then 00

This is a discussion on Salesperson says #4 buck is better then 00 within the Defensive Ammunition & Ballistics forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; So I was at Bass Pro shop today picking up my birthday present 870 Marine Mag and some shells. I got couple boxes of the ...

Salesperson says #4 buck is better then 00

So I was at Bass Pro shop today picking up my birthday present 870 Marine Mag and some shells. I got couple boxes of the cheapest dove load to break it in and some 2 3/4 00 buck for HD. The sales guy got on a hard sell that #4 buck was better then 00, how the troops in Iraq stopped useing 00 buck because it wasn't dropping BGs. He told me that they use 3'' #4 buck because it's got 41 pellets inside of it and it works much better.

First is there truth to this? Did the troops switch to #4 buck?

Second does what works in a combat theater translate directly to a HD role?

Salesperson is a moron, regardless of what truth (if any) is in his statements.

I can't say for certain what the troops are using these days. We had 00 and slugs for our shotguns in Afghanistan, and no one ever complained about them. I would not have allowed my troops to carry #4 except on some very specific operations.

I can tell you that the Marine Security Guards working in the Embassies around the world switched a good number of years ago FROM #4 TO 00; take that for what it's worth.

No, combat and HD are not directly translatable, but they share enough similarities that TRUTHFUL info on what works and doesn't work in combat is worth looking at for HD.

A man fires a rifle for many years, and he goes to war. And afterward he turns the rifle in at the armory, and he believes he's finished with the rifle. But no matter what else he might do with his hands - love a woman, build a house, change his son's diaper - his hands remember the rifle.

Lot's of naysayers will poo poo this idea.. but my HD shotgun leads with low brass #6 and finishes with #2 buck. Either will make a mess of a drywall house... and if you read enough "facts" on the internet you could come to a split decision as to the terminal effects of either load against human targets.

I don't know what the militarys of the US or world are using this year as related to shotgun (too many units, divisions and general policys to track unless you are actively in the market of selling them ammo), and I don't care. They have constraints, conditions and regs. to follow within that we civilians do not have to deal with...Nor suffer.

But your guy at Bass pro Shops was not leading you wrongly.

In fact this very subject came up a week ago in a thread at the rifle & shotgun area.
Read this thread in whole for general knowledge absorption...

As specific to your question go to this posting by LanceORYGUN within that thread.
He saves me time in writing up a good detail on why #4 Buck is a better choice than 00 Buck, which from the read of your conversation is exactly where the Bass pro guy was going.

Now keep in mind there is #4 birdshot AND #4 BUCKSHOT.
They are very different and do not confuse the two by simply thinking '#4'.
Further there is a #4 Buck Magnum with a 3" shell length which even further increases the shot volume to a given pattern.

Again not knowing the details and specifics of .MIL application, I can though very easilly see what the Bass Pro guy was telling you and why as related to 00 Buck.
All things being relative at 2 3/4" 00 Buck as used in military action is going to have a less dense pattern in the way of shot volume, regardless of distance to the target, in comparison to that of #4 Buck.

Remember what determines stopping power against _human threats_ is the ability of a projectile(s) to penetrate and either destroy by crushing force a major internal organ (Heart, liver, spleen or lungs).
Or to pierce a major blood sources as to cause it to lose pressure and result in overall body system reduction/loss of blood pressure internally at major blood volume delivery areas (superior vena cava, aortic arch at the chest, or an aorta such as at the abdomen or legs).
For more info on the human circulatory system click here; Heart secret
Then of course lastly the third way to very effectively stop a human threat is to destroy the central nervous system which is comprised of just two major components; The lower brain and the spinal cord.

Now with just X amount of pellet shot volume being fired out of a typically for military and law enforcement purpose cylinder bore shotgun, what would you prefer to have at hand IF you have the choice?

BTW do not think that this is about firing pellets down a hall and increasing odds of hitting a target(s).
That is very commonly folks assumption during conversations and review of this subject, but that is incorrect. It's all about getting as many pellets into the target as fired upon AND those pellets having enough density in shot pattern to disrupt/stop the threat through immediate pain (!) and/or blood loss, if not in mass to penetrate the threats armor (clothing, skin, fat, muscle and bone) to impact and pierce as to destroy major organs and/or circulatory components.

Know that when using a shotgun for purpose of 'combat' be it civilian HD or by persons directed by some dept./agency/govt. the focus is not to be shooting at distance toward game animals standing or moving away.
Our focus is to be shooting toward human beings who very likely will be closing rather than fleeing and they too will be armed to the teeth trying to hurt if not stop you.

Do your thinking on your own and run the math as you see it.

As related to what the military current or past might have used, do not allow that in specific to sway you one way or another.
The same military that standardized on 9mm for handguns because or NATO partners had gone that route for reasons having little to nothing to do with stopping capability.
The same military that standardized on 5.56 because of primary focus toward logistics of ammo supply/resupply factors and ease of troop carry by way of primarily weight.
The same military that standardized on use of full metal jacket only handgun and rifle rounds; When the world fully well knows by fact of science and human shooting experience that jacketed hollow point, copper hollowpoint, and copper solids work exceedingly well and _better_ than jacketed copper ball projectiles.

One could go on for some time with many more examples of same.
Just because a given military runs or ran with some given tool or ammunition is not at all a valid reason to adopt same and thus limit ones self as a civilian, who otherwise is generally and largely not limited procurement by conditions, fulfillment regulations and artificial application limitations.

$0.02 Street

- Janq

P.S. - I have never been on 'patrol' and never will, the military didn't and won't have me for reasons not within my own control.
But no matter I don't have to have worn green, brown, blue or black issued clothing to do and understand mathematics, human biology, and to do my own homework while being able to think on my own.
No disrespect of course to those who have and do wear such issued clothing, but at the same time just because they do does not mean at all that they are better or even aware of the how other options in this area might work equally or even possibly better to a given application.
Lastly also know that the vast majority of persons who have been on 'patrol' wearing such issue clothing have never actually fired a gun with immediate combat purpose toward a threat, that was oncoming or worst firing back.
Don't take my word on that, just ask for example any cop the question of; "Have you ever shot anyone?".

For HD (meaning across-the-room or other-end-of-the-hallway distances) I want as many projectiles as possible to ensue hitting something with something. Putting it bluntly--I want coverage. At that short range, I think almost anything will stop a BG (nothing like a facefull of #6 shot to ruin your day (night).

Now if the senerio were to be outside of the house proper, then the larger shot will certainly offer more range than the smaller. But inside? I'll take #4 Buck over 00.

One more point. Back in my SC deer hunting days, the fellow who dropped more deer than the rest of us always used #1 or #4 buckshot. His theory was more shot makes more wounds. It worked for him.

The larger diameter/caliber shot of 00 Buck is good/better for increased range as in _distance_ as related to retaining energy as fired at the muzzle _AND_ for by that retention increasing the odds of hitting the target (game animal or human threat) at some place on it's body as within the vitals to a degree enough to damage the any of the three areas I'd commented toward above.

Very often in convos like this people forget, or don't know/understand, the physics dynamics behind shot as related to shot pattern density and shot projectile weight as well as shot projectile energy as applied to a given distance.

The dude at Bass Pro showed an understanding for this and by report was actually trying to do the OP a solid in sharing same with him as being a customer.

Anybody can get a job at anywhere, FT or PT, and understand physics. Physics like math is everywhere.
I would not discount a person simply because of where they work or what they do, just same as I would not give blind validity to persons just because they happen to wear or have worn green, brown, blue or black clothing.

- Janq

P.S. - Note I specifically left out white (Navy), because everybody knows they don't shoot anything but missiles and torpedos. :p

How well does #4 buck penetrate in ballistic gel? It is known that penetrating vitals is how you stop someone, so how deep a round penetrates seems like it would be much more important that the density of its pattern, within reason.

Agreed, to a point Janq (and others). For most inside-the-home scenarios, I think #4 buck is a fine choice. Where I lost my faith in #4 was out beyond 15m or so.

Remember me saying that the MSG program switched from #4 to 00? Well, two posts ago, we had a TON of #4 buck (2 3/4") left in the arms room. It needed to get used up, so I started shooting it in IPSC 3-gun competitions (building relationships with local police and military, dontcha' know). Out of my (admittedly unusually short) 14"bbl Rem 870, the #4 would not knock down the steel targets. I'm talking the smaller, square IPSC targets, not the torso sized ones... I knew I was getting hits, the steel would "ping" and wobble, but it would only fall half the time at 15m and NEVER at 25m. Yes, more pellets, but FAR less energy once you leave bad breath distances.

So, for HD (and out of a longer bbl shotgun, and with possibly 3" loads) the #4 buck is a very good choice. For wider applications (combat, certainly, but even perimeter or semi-rural "homestead" defense) I am still sold on the retained energy of the heavier pellets.

I wouldn't consider anything less than #4 for defensive work, no matter how many "face full of birdshot" wishful-thinking fantasies I hear.

A man fires a rifle for many years, and he goes to war. And afterward he turns the rifle in at the armory, and he believes he's finished with the rifle. But no matter what else he might do with his hands - love a woman, build a house, change his son's diaper - his hands remember the rifle.

I just learned something else today! Thanks guys, good discussion. I keep 00 Buck at the house if needed, but I shoot mostly #8 for skeet, trap, sporting clays so outside of the 00 Buck I have not really investigate this much. I plan to do some more follow-up study with the links posted.

I just learned something else today! Thanks guys, good discussion. I keep 00 Buck at the house if needed, but I shoot mostly #8 for skeet, trap, sporting clays so outside of the 00 Buck I have not really investigate this much. I plan to do some more follow-up study with the links posted.

Kudos

Have you patterned your gun with buck yet?

I'm not a shotgun guy, but I do know that at the long gun class I took the center of the pattern varied pretty widely between bird and buckshot for the shotgun shooters.